Lone Star Showdown: Why Texas is at the epicenter of the battle for America's future

D. Earl Stephens
December 11, 2023 

Photo by Tiziano Brignoli on Unsplash

This article was paid for by Raw Story subscribers. Not a subscriber? Try us and go ad-free for $1. Prefer to give a one-time tip? Click here.

There is a battle underway in Texas right now that I believe has significant repercussions for the future of the United States of America, and who leads this country in the future.

Kate Cox, a 31-year-old mother of two who lives in the Dallas area, is heartbreakingly finding out what it means to live in a state with one of the toughest abortion bans in this crazy country.

Cox is pregnant, and her fetus has been diagnosed with a condition called, trisomy 18, which is nearly always fatal for the fetus, and is always very dangerous for the mother. Cox, who is now 20 weeks pregnant, had been suffering with severe pain and discharge during her pregnancy before getting this terrible diagnosis.

As strict as the Texas laws are about preventing abortions, there are rare exceptions, and Cox was granted one of these by Judge Maya Guerra Gamble of the Travis County District Court. Gamble ruled that the procedure was “necessary to protect Cox from a potentially dangerous birth, and to preserve her future fertility.”

Only hours later, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who is a known monster, sent a threatening letter to the hospital where Cox’s doctor practices, saying in part that “the Temporary Restraining Order will not insulate you or anyone else …”

In other words, the Texas danger, Paxton, was bravely coming after the mother and her doctor. He brought his sickening rage in front of the Texas Supreme Court, which late Friday overturned the lower court’s ruling.

Paxton, you might remember, is the guy who was investigated for bribery this year and is known as one of the most corrupt public officials in Texas, which is really quite a feat. He was within inches of being thrown out of office, before Republicans reconsidered the whole thing and decided they needed more guys like him around to ensure they were some of the most odious political bodies on the planet, including the Taliban.

As I type this, the Texas Supreme Court, which is made up of nine fanatic Republican justices has continued its stay on the court-approved abortion and Cox has reportedly fled Texas to an unidentified state where she will have the abortion.

“Her health is on the line. She’s been in and out of the emergency room and she couldn’t wait any longer,” said Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, which was representing Cox.

As this horrendous ruling starts getting national attention, we are seeing reporting that one of these justices is a lowlife named John Devine.

Devine is a religious zealot, who has been arrested 37 times for blocking abortion clinics, and has been involved in a never-ending fight to keep the Ten Commandments displayed in his Houston courtroom.

But this is the absolutely chilling part:

Devine’s wife, Nubia, was involved in a high-risk pregnancy herself, while carrying her seventh child. Doctors said the pregnancy was likely to end in the deaths of both mother and child. The Devines went ahead with it anyway. Nubia Devine survived the birth. Their daughter lived only for an hour after she was born.

Nubia Devine is a self-described “religious freedom activist” and is also very active in Texas politics.

They have both proven themselves to be dangerous as hell.

It is hard to believe this radical, rightwing Texas Supreme Court will ultimately rule in favor of Cox, but whether they do or don’t, this story should be screamed from the rooftops of every household in the United State of America, and for damn sure by those who control the deep pockets inside the Democratic National Committee.

The repulsive actions of these Texas Republicans is a political gift for Democrats.

I admittedly feel a bit gross putting it that way, given a woman’s life, and her reproductive right are on the line, but I believe highlighting horrible stories like this one might preserve the rights of countless other women, including my daughters, in the future.

I did something I rarely do anymore, and posted about this gross injustice on Facebook Friday. Predictably, the response I got was muted, because most of my “friends” there would rather not get bogged down by politics. I get it. It’s all too much these days, and we all need an escape to keep our sanity. (That’s me preaching, but as always, not practicing.)


I did get one interesting response on my post via a direct message from a longtime real friend, who I believe is a Republican. She told me that what I posted was “fake news.”

If you want to really get my blood boiling, mention the term “fake news.” It literally gets me to hate-sweating. “Fake news” was traitor Trump’s go-to belch when reacting to completely true things in the run-up to the nightmarish 2016 election. The term was used so much it unfortunately got some acceptance in American parlance.

If I never hear those two words again in five lifetimes, it will be too soon.

When I replied to my friend that it was, in fact, very, very “real” news, and attached several stories about it, she said, “Dang.”

She really didn’t know. And she really didn’t like it.

I am going to guess she gets most of her news out of the Fox sewer system, and doesn't bother with anything that comes at her with two sides on it.


How many other people out there aren’t aware of this gross injustice in Texas? Millions? Tens of millions?

Probably.

So far, we know one thing for sure surrounding this abortion issue: It is motivating voters to take action and protect their rights like nothing I can remember before it.

We have seen this in blue states, purple states and red states. It is a political winner for Democrats and a resounding loser for Republicans.

Here in the Battleground State of Wisconsin, we finally flipped our Supreme Court from red to blue in April when Justice Janet Protasiewicz walloped her conservative foe by 11 points.

Anybody who reads me even infrequently knows that I have been banging away that our Democracy is on the line in 2024. I believe it is the issue of my lifetime, but I am not convinced it is the motivating factor at the polls that I desperately think it should be.


Reproductive rights and healthcare rights are a subset of our Democracy. They are about ensuring women aren’t dragged back to seemingly dystopian times when they didn't even have the vote.

These are sad, powerful stories that need telling. This is what is on the line in 2024, America.

I am sorry beyond words for what you are going through right now, Kate Cox, but I will never forget you for as long as I live. I hope others will feel the same way when they go into the voting booth next year.

D. Earl Stephens is the author of “Toxic Tales: A Caustic Collection of Donald J. Trump’s Very Important Letters” and finished up a 30-year career in journalism as the Managing Editor of Stars and Stripes. Follow @EarlofEnough and on his website.

Disinformation is rampant on social media – a social psychologist explains the tactics use

The Conversation
December 11, 2023 


Information warfare abounds, and everyone online has been drafted whether they know it or not.

Disinformation is deliberately generated misleading content disseminated for selfish or malicious purposes. Unlike misinformation, which may be shared unwittingly or with good intentions, disinformation aims to foment distrust, destabilize institutions, discredit good intentions, defame opponents and delegitimize sources of knowledge such as science and journalism.

Many governments engage in disinformation campaigns. For instance, the Russian government has used images of celebrities to attract attention to anti-Ukraine propaganda. Meta, parent company of Facebook and Instagram, warned on Nov. 30, 2023, that China has stepped up its disinformation operations.

Disinformation is nothing new, and information warfare has been practiced by many countries, including the U.S. But the internet gives disinformation campaigns unprecedented reach. Foreign governments, internet trolls, domestic and international extremists, opportunistic profiteers and even paid disinformation agencies exploit the internet to spread questionable content. Periods of civil unrest, natural disasters, health crises and wars trigger anxiety and the hunt for information, which disinformation agents take advantage of.

Meta has uncovered and blocked sophisticated Chinese disinformation campaigns.

Certainly it’s worth watching for the warning signs for misinformation and dangerous speech, but there are additional tactics disinformation agents employ.

It’s just a joke

Hahaganda is a tactic in which disinformation agents use memes, political comedy from state-run outlets, or speeches to make light of serious matters, attack others, minimize violence or dehumanize, and deflect blame.

This approach provides an easy defense: If challenged, the disinformation agents can say, “Can’t you take a joke?” often followed by accusations of being too politically correct.

Shhh … tell everyone

Rumor-milling is a tactic in which the disinformation agents claim to have exclusive access to secrets they allege are being purposefully concealed. They indicate that you will “only hear this here” and will imply that others are unwilling to share the alleged truth – for example, “The media won’t report this” or “The government doesn’t want you to know” and “I shouldn’t be telling you this … .”

But they do not insist that the information be kept secret, and will instead include encouragement to share it – for example, “Make this go viral” or “Most people won’t have the courage to share this.” It’s important to question how an author or speaker could have come by such “secret” information and what their motive is to prompt you to share it.

People are saying

Often disinformation has no real evidence, so instead disinformation agents will find or make up people to support their assertions. This impersonation can take multiple forms. Disinformation agents will use anecdotes as evidence, especially sympathetic stories from vulnerable groups such as women or children.

Similarly, they may disseminate “concerned citizens’” perspectives. These layperson experts present their social identity as providing the authority to speak on a matter; “As a mother …,” “As a veteran …,” “As a police officer ….” Convert communicators, or people who allegedly change from the “wrong” position to the “right” one, can be especially persuasive, such as the woman who got an abortion but regretted it. These people often don’t actually exist or may be coerced or paid.

If ordinary people don’t suffice, fake experts may be used. Some are fabricated, and you can watch out for “inauthentic user” behavior, for example, by checking X – formerly Twitter – accounts using the Botometer. But fake experts can come in different varieties.A faux expert is someone used for their title but doesn’t have actual relevant expertise.

A pseudoexpert is someone who claims relevant expertise but has no actual training.
A junk expert is a sellout. They may have had expertise once but now say whatever is profitable. You can often find these people have supported other dubious claims – for example, that smoking doesn’t cause cancer – or work for institutes that regularly produce questionable “scholarship.”

An echo expert is when disinformation sources cite each other to provide credence for their claims. China and Russia routinely cite one another’s newspapers.

A stolen expert is someone who exists, but they weren’t actually contacted and their research is misinterpreted. Likewise, disinformation agents also steal credibility from known news sources, such as by typosquatting, the practice of setting up a domain name that closely resembles a legitimate organization’s.

You can check whether accounts, anecdotal or scientific, have been verified by other reliable sources. Google the name. Check expertise status, source validity and interpretation of research. Remember, one story or interpretation is not necessarily representative.

It’s all a conspiracy

Conspiratorial narratives involve some malevolent force – for example, “the deep state” – engaged in covert actions with the aim to cause harm to society. That certain conspiracies such as MK-Ultra and Watergate have been confirmed is often offered as evidence for the validity of new unfounded conspiracies.

Nonetheless, disinformation agents find that constructing a conspiracy is an effective means to remind people of past reasons to distrust governments, scientists or other trustworthy sources.

But extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Remember, the conspiracies that were ultimately unveiled had evidence – often from sources like investigative journalists, scientists and government investigations. Be particularly wary of conspiracies that try to delegitimize knowledge-producing institutions like universities, research labs, government agencies and news outlets by claiming that they are in on a cover-up.

Basic tips for resisting disinformation and misinformation include thinking twice before sharing social media posts that trigger emotional responses like anger and fear and checking the sources of posts that make unusual or extraordinary claims.

Good vs. evil

Disinformation often serves the dual purpose of making the originator look good and their opponents look bad. Disinformation takes this further by painting issues as a battle between good and evil, using accusations of evilness to legitimize violence. Russia is particularly fond of accusing others of being secret Nazis, pedophiles or Satanists. Meanwhile, they often depict their soldiers as helping children and the elderly.

Be especially wary of accusations of atrocities like genocide, especially under the attention-grabbing “breaking news” headline. Accusations abound. Verify the facts and how the information was obtained.

Are you with us or against us?

A false dichotomy narrative sets up the reader to believe that they have one of two mutually exclusive options; a good or a bad one, a right or a wrong one, a red pill or a blue pill. You can accept their version of reality or be an idiot or “sheeple.”

There are always more options than those being presented, and issues are rarely so black and white. This is just one of the tactics in brigading, where disinformation agents seek to silence dissenting viewpoints by casting them as the wrong choice.

Turning the tables

Whataboutism is a classic Russian disinformation technique they use to deflect attention from their own wrongdoings by alleging the wrongdoings of others. These allegations about the actions of others may be true or false but are nonetheless irrelevant to the matter at hand. The potential past wrongs of one group does not mean you should ignore the current wrongs of another.

Disinformation agents also often cast their group as the wronged party. They only engage in disinformation because their “enemy” engages in disinformation against them; they only attack to defend; and their reaction was appropriate, while that of others was an overreaction. This type of competitive victimhood is particularly pervasive when groups have been embedded in a long-lasting conflict.

In all of these cases, the disinformation agent is aware that they are deflecting, misleading, trolling or outright fabricating. If you don’t believe them, they at least want to make you question what, if anything, you can believe.

You often look into the things you buy rather than taking the advertising at face value before you hand over your money. This should also go for what information you buy into.

H. Colleen Sinclair, Associate Research Professor of Social Psychology, Louisiana State University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

What’s the point of giving gifts? Anthropologist explains this ancient part of being human

The Conversation
December 12, 2023

A Gift Box

Have you planned out your holiday gift giving yet? If you’re anything like me, you might be waiting until the last minute. But whether every single present is already wrapped and ready, or you’ll hit the shops on Christmas Eve, giving gifts is a curious but central part of being human.

While researching my new book, “So Much Stuff,” on how humanity has come to depend on tools and technology over the last 3 million years, I became fascinated by the purpose of giving things away. Why would people simply hand over something precious or valuable when they could use it themselves?

To me as an anthropologist, this is an especially powerful question because giving gifts likely has ancient roots. And gifts can be found in every known culture around the world.

So, what explains the power of the present?

Undoubtedly, gifts serve lots of purposes. Some psychologists have observed a “warm glow” – an intrinsic delight – that’s associated with giving presents. Theologians have noted how gifting is a way to express moral values, such as love, kindness and gratitude, in Catholicism, Buddhism and Islam. And philosophers ranging from Seneca to Friedrich Nietzsche regarded gifting as the best demonstration of selflessness. It’s little wonder that gifts are a central part of Hannukah, Christmas, Kwanzaa and other winter holidays – and that some people may even be tempted to regard Black Friday, the opening of the year-end shopping season, as a holiday in itself.

But of all the explanations for why people give gifts, the one I find most convincing was offered in 1925 by a French anthropologist named Marcel Mauss.


A thoughtful gift can feel worth more than its cash value.

  fstop123/E+ via Getty Images

Giving, receiving, reciprocating

Like many anthropologists, Mauss was puzzled by societies in which gifts were extravagantly given away.

For example, along the northwest coast of Canada and the United States, Indigenous peoples conduct potlatch ceremonies. In these dayslong feasts, hosts give away immense amounts of property. Consider a famous potlatch in 1921, held by a clan leader of the Kwakwaka’wakw Nation in Canada who gave community members 400 sacks of flour, heaps of blankets, sewing machines, furniture, canoes, gas-powered boats and even pool tables.

In a now-famous essay titled “The Gift,” originally published almost a century ago, Mauss sees potlaches as an extreme form of gifting. Yet, he suggests this behavior is totally recognizable in most every human society: We give things away even when keeping them for ourselves would seem to make much more economic and evolutionary sense.

Mauss observed that gifts create three separate but inextricably related actions. Gifts are given, received and reciprocated.

The first act of giving establishes the virtues of the gift giver. They express their generosity, kindness and honor.

The act of receiving the gift, in turn, shows a person’s willingness to be honored. This is a way for the receiver to show their own generosity, that they are willing to accept what was offered to them.

The third component of gift giving is reciprocity, returning in kind what was first given. Essentially, the person who received the gift is now expected – implicitly or explicitly – to give a gift back to the original giver.

But then, of course, once the first person gets something back, they must return yet another gift to the person who received the original gift. In this way, gifting becomes an endless loop of giving and receiving, giving and receiving.

This last step – reciprocity – is what makes gifts unique. Unlike buying something at a store, in which the exchange ends when money is traded for goods, giving gifts builds and sustains relationships. This relationship between the gift giver and receiver is bound up with morality. Gifting is an expression of fairness because each present is generally of equal or greater value than what was last given. And gifting is an expression of respect because it shows a willingness to honor the other person.

In these ways, gifting tethers people together. It keeps people connected in an infinite cycle of mutual obligations.


The year-end shopping frenzy can tip away from meaningful gift exchange to expensive consumerism. 

Atlantide Phototravel/Corbis Documentary via Getty Images

Giving better gifts

Are modern-day consumers unknowingly embodying Mauss’ theory a little too well? After all, many people today suffer not from the lack of gifts, but from an overabundance.

Gallup reports that the average American holiday shopper estimates they’ll spend US$975 on presents in 2023, the highest amount since this survey began in 1999.

And many gifts are simply thrown out. In the 2019 holiday season, it was estimated that more than $15 billion of gifts purchased by Americans were unwanted, with 4% going directly to the landfill. This year, holiday spending is expected to increase in the U.K., Canada, Japan and elsewhere.

Modern-day gifting practices may be the source of both awe and anger. On the one hand, by giving presents you are engaging in an ancient behavior that makes us human by growing and sustaining our relationships. On the other hand, it seems as if some societies might be using the holiday season as an excuse to simply consume more and more.

Mauss’ ideas do not promote runaway consumerism. On the contrary, his explanations of gifts suggest that the more meaningful and personal the present, the greater the respect and honor being shown. A truly thoughtful gift is far less likely to end up in a dump. And vintage, upcycled, handmade goods – or a personalized experience such as a food tour or hot air balloon ride – might even be more valued than an expensive item mass-produced on the other side of the world, shipped across oceans and packaged in plastic.

Quality gifts can speak to your values and more meaningfully sustain your relationships.

Chip Colwell, Associate Research Professor of Anthropology, University of Colorado Denver

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Why tornado outbreaks happen in the East during winter and not in Tornado Alley: report

Sarah K. Burris
December 10, 2023 


Another winter of storms breaking out across the southeastern United States is reviving the conversation about the "movement" of the so-called "Tornado Alley," which is what the central U.S. is sometimes called. There are also questions about how climate change is bringing more deadly outbreaks year-round. The evidence shows it isn't what you might think.

Over the weekend, Tennessee had a tornado outbreak that spun an EF-2 and EF3 tornado, which brought with them 111-135 mph winds and 136-165 mph winds respectively. Six people were killed, including three who were sheltering in a trailer. Those three included a mother and her 2-year-old son.

In the middle of the country, storms tend to break out more in the spring. In the winter months the Jet Stream shifts, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) says. With it, the warm moist air coming from the Gulf of Mexico clashes again with cool dry air coming from the Arctic. When the two air masses come together they create the conditions ripe for tornadoes and severe storms to form.

Such was the case with a Jan. 16, 2023 outbreak in which a tornado touched down in eastern Iowa. The Dec. 10, 2021 outbreak, however, set the record for the most tornadoes in the winter, with 71 confirmed tornadoes in 24 hours. Mayfield, Kentucky, in particular, was completely devastated.

Scientific America crafted an attempt at trying to explain that somehow Tornado Alley was shifting, but it takes into account only They collected all of the data of tornado outbreaks from 1950-1980 and put it in one data set and large tornado outbreaks from 1989-2019. They plotted them all on a map, but only looked at "a large outbreak defined as a day when eight or more counties experience tornadoes of strength EF-1 or higher."

There is not enough data available to chart all of the tornadoes between 1950 and 1980 to compare to tornadoes from 1989 to 2019. The report never explains why there are nine years missing in their data. The leaps in both technology and detection have changed so drastically that there simply isn't enough information to reasonably conclude Tornado Alley has "shifted."

National Geographic explains that there's no real evidence that shows there are a greater number of tornadoes happening in the United States either. The problem with the data, they explain, is that it's woefully inadequate. Looking at the track record of tornadoes from the 1950s through the 1980s lacks the same scientific standards used to measure tornadoes. In fact, it lacks all of the meteorological standards today.

The Fujita Scale wasn't introduced until 1971, which ranked tornadoes by how much they destroyed. So, no scale existed for storms prior to that data, NOAA says. There wasn't a way to calculate the wind speed in or around the funnel unless it happened to mow over a tool that measured it.

The problem with the F-Scale system, however, was that it required qualified meteorologists and engineers to observe, analyze and report their findings. There were parts of the country where a powerful tornado could have dropped down, but due to the small population, it may not have even been reported, much less measured. As National Geographic explains, the U.S. population was half the size in 1950 to what it is today.

While Doppler radar was utilized by the military in the 1940s and by air travel starting in the early 1950s, it wasn't until Dick Doviak moved to Oklahoma in 1971 that the National Severe Storms Laboratory began using the radar to monitor storms, NOAA recalled in his 2021 obituary.

The "Enhanced Fujita Scale" was established in 2007, Weather.gov said. That's when modern technology came together to calculate both the conditions and destruction due to a tornado. So, mapping tornadoes for 60 years with a 21st-century scale, and using incomplete data puts researchers in a quandary for how to properly chart whether or not the storms are increasing in number or in size. The only real apples-to-apples comparisons come from more advanced radar after 1971 and the availability of better technology that can measure the storms in real time, which wasn't broadly available until at least the mid-1990s.

"A lot more are being recorded now than in 1950, but a closer look at the data shows the increase is only in the weakest category, EF0. There's been no increase in stronger twisters, and maybe even a slight decrease in EF4s and EF5s," the National Geographic explained. "That suggests we're just spotting more of the weak and short-lived tornadoes than we did back when the country was emptier (the United States population in 1950 was less than half what it is now), we didn't have Doppler radar, and Oklahoma highways weren't jammed with storm-chasers."


So, there's no real evidence to prove Tornado Alley is shifting to the east because scientists don't have a lot of data to compare it to. Outside of the SyFy network, it doesn't appear any researchers studying whether a "Sharknado" or even a "Snownado" are possible.

How is the Great Wall of China still standing? A ‘living skin’ is helping, study says

2023/12/11

The Great Wall of China snakes 13,170 miles and dates back more than 2,300 years. - Marlise Kast-Myers/Marlise Kast-Myers/TNS

Snaking hundreds of miles across mountains and plains, the Great Wall of China is an iconic and unparalleled historic site. Construction on the vast network of walls, fortresses and other fortifications began in the seventh century B.C. and continued until the 17th century A.D.

The monumental structure has stood the test of time — in part because of a “living skin,” scientists recently found.

Researchers wanted to figure out the best way to help protect the Great Wall of China from wind and erosion, according to a study published Dec. 8 in the journal Science Advances. They noticed that the structure was “largely colonized by biocrusts.”

Biocrusts, or “biological soil crusts,” are thin layers of mosses, lichens, cyanobacteria and other vegetation that function like a “living skin,” according to a 2018 study on the topic.

Researchers wanted to know if the biocrusts growing on the Great Wall of China were helping or hurting the structure. They surveyed about 375 miles of walls and fortresses built about 500 years ago to evaluate the biocrusts, level of preservation and other factors, the study said.

Photos show several of these survey sites and two types of biocrusts that researchers studied.

“We found that biocrusts play an essential role in reducing erosion in the Great Wall compared with bare walls,” researchers said.

Biocrusts helped protect the structure by reducing wind speeds, absorbing raindrops, preventing harmful materials from getting inside, stabilizing the soil within and acting as a temperature buffer, the study said. The overall result is increased stability and decreased risk of erosion.

Researchers said biocrusts were helpful for the Great Wall because, unlike other historic structures, it has many sections built with soil, dirt and “rammed earth.”

Rather than removing biocrust vegetation from the historic structure, researchers argued for allowing it to grow naturally and intentionally introducing the plants to bare areas. The main disadvantage of this approach is it may “disfigure the original appearance and aesthetics,” the study said.

The research team included Yousong Cao, Matthew Bowker, Manuel Delgado-Baquerizo and Bo Xiao.

_____

© The Charlotte Observer

US House passes bill banning uranium imports from Russia

GOOD NEWS FOR SASKATCHEWAN

By Timothy Gardner

2023/12/11

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The U.S. House of Representatives on Monday passed a ban on imports of Russian uranium as lawmakers seek to add pressure on Moscow for its war on Ukraine, though the measure has waivers in case of supply concerns for domestic reactors.

The bill must pass the Senate and be signed by President Joe Biden before becoming law. It is uncertain whether there will be enough time in the Senate schedule for it to be voted on this year.

The bill, passed by voice vote in the House after the chamber suspended usual voting rules on the measure, would ban the imports 90 days after enactment, subject to the waivers.

The House bill contains waivers allowing the import of low-enriched uranium from Russia if the U.S. energy secretary determines there is no alternative source available for operation of a nuclear reactor or a U.S. nuclear energy company, or if the shipments are in the national interest.

"The risks of continuing this dependence on Russia for our nuclear fuels are simply too great," said Republican Representative Cathy McMorris Rodgers before the vote. "It's weakening America's nuclear fuel infrastructure, which has declined significantly because of reliance on these cheap fuels."

The United States banned imports of Russia oil after the invasion of Ukraine last year and imposed a price cap with other Western countries on sea-borne exports of its crude and oil products, but it has not banned imports of its uranium.

U.S. nuclear power plants imported about 12% of their uranium from Russia in 2022, compared to 27% from Canada and 25% from Kazakhstan, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. The United States was the source of about 5% of uranium used domestically that year, the EIA said.

Allowed imports of Russian uranium under the waiver would be gradually reduced to 459 metric tons in 2027 from about 476.5 tons in 2024.

(Reporting by Timothy Gardner; Editing by Stephen Coates and Sandra Maler)

© Reuters

UK
As under-investigation water company makes eye-watering dividend payout, Tory MPs vote down sewage sickness compensation schem

'It’s shameful' that the 'Conservative government have once again put water companies’ profits before people’s health.'

Gabrielle Pickard-Whitehead 

10 December, 2023 

Left Foot Forward

Conservative MPs have been slammed for voting against a compensation scheme that would be awarded to swimmers who become ill from sewage in UK waters.

The amendment to the Victims and Prisoners Bill was tabled by Liberal Democrat MP, Tim Farron. It would have allowed anyone who gets sick as a result of illegal sewage dumping to claim compensation from water companies. But the amendment was voted down in the Commons on December 4.

The latest Surfers Against Sewage’s (SAS) annual report shows that during the last year, there has been 1,924 cases of illness due to suspected sewage pollution, marking an almost threefold increase on the year before. The Water Quality Report also found there were 301,091 sewage discharges in England during the 2023 bathing season.

In August, 57 swimmers fell sick after competing at the World Triathlon Championship series in Sunderland. The stretch of coastline off Sunderland has been the focus of a long-running battle between campaigners and the government over sewage discharges and regulatory failures. Australian triathlete Jacob Birtwhistle said he had felt unwell after the event. “Have been feeling pretty rubbish since the race, but I guess that’s what happens when you swim in shit. The swim should have been cancelled,” he posted on Instagram.

Northumbrian Water insisted it was not to blame for the sicknesses and that it had not recorded any discharges that might have affected the water quality at the coastal spot since October 2021.

In response to the turning down of the proposed sickness compensation this week, Victoria Collins, Liberal Democrat Spokesperson for Harpenden & Berkhamsted, said:

“It’s shameful that Bim Afolami, Gagan Mohindra and their Conservative government have once again put water companies’ profits before people’s health.

“It is a complete slap in the face to all those in Harpenden, Berkhamsted and our surrounding villages who expect their MP to stand up and fight for them, instead of for massive companies who have dumped filthy sewage into our rivers and lakes.”

Sarah Dyke, Lib Dem MP for Somerton and Frome, also criticised the government for voting against the amendment, and called for urgent government action.

“Our waterways can recover, but they need action now, before it is too late. We need a tax on sewage water companies, not huge holiday bonuses. We need a tough, toothed tiger shark of a regulator. We need our environment to have long-term protection from a serious and committed government.

“This government urgently needs to listen to the people speaking up for our silent water,” said Dyke.

Labour is calling on the government to give water regulators the power to ban the bonuses of the chief executives of water companies, if their organisations are polluting UK waterways. The calls were made in a motion tabled to the House of Commons this week.

The senior executives of five of the 11 water companies which manage sewage took bonuses in 2023. Those at the other six turned them down, following public outrage. South East Water, has reportedly paid out dividends of £2.25m over six months while overseeing increased losses of £18.1m before tax and being in a mountain of debt. The company is already under investigation by the water regulator OFWAT, after thousands of the company’s customers were left without running water this summer.

Following the news of South East Water payout, GMB, the water union, criticised the ‘payout’ culture of the UK’s water sector. Gary Carter, GMB National Officer, said:

“People are utterly sick of hearing about failing water companies stumping up fortunes in dividends.

“OFWAT and the government must put an end to the water sector’s out of control payout culture.

“This money needs to be spent investing in infrastructure to reduce sewage spills and clean up the country’s rivers, before shareholders get their piece of the pie.

“For too long money has been flowing out and debts have been piling up. It must stop.”

Labour accused the government of allowing the water firms to openly pollute Britain’s lakes, rivers and seas with sewage.

“This Conservative government has wilfully turned a blind eye to negligence at the heart of the water industry.

“The result is stinking, toxic sewage destroying our countryside, and consumers facing higher bills while water bosses pocket millions in bonuses,” said shadow environment secretary Steve Reed.

Gabrielle Pickard-Whitehead is a contributing editor to Left Foot Forward

UK

Unions and celebrities launch campaign for a new, more caring refugee scheme

Only one in four Tory voters think the government’s approach to the asylum system is working well

Hannah Davenport 11 December, 2023 

LEFT FOOT FORWARD

Influential figures including Gary Lineker and actor Brian Cox, along with trade unions, are calling on MPs to scrap the Rwanda deportation scheme, slamming the government’s ‘badly managed, uncaring and costly’ current refugee policies.

The Fair Begins Here campaign was launched today with an open letter to politicians, demanding their commitment to a fair new plan for refugees. This includes ditching the latest revised Rwanda Bill which MPs are set to vote on Tuesday.

Backing the campaign are BMA, UNISON, PCS and National Association of Head Teachers union, along with actress Sophie Okonedo, rapper Big Zuu, General Lord Richard Dannatt as well as prominent faith leaders and human rights campaigner.

The campaign coalition Together for Refugees also released an exclusive poll which revealed that 80% of the British public want a fair, compassionate and better managed approach to the asylum system, with only one in four Conservative voters thinking the government’s current plan is working well.

With a backlog of more than 109,000 asylum cases, over 55,000 people still living in temporary hotel rooms and charities warning of soaring numbers of refugees being made homeless this winter, the current system is clearly failing.

Succession actor Brian Cox who signed the letter said the UK’s asylum system was “in a shambles” and that a “total rethink” of the system was needed.

“Not least with the government’s continued attempts to push through the awful scheme to send people to Rwanda.” Cox said. “We need a total rethink. Political leaders must create a system that is not just properly managed but is fair and has compassion at its heart.”

Former footballer and TV presenter Gary Lineker has previously used his platform to speak out against the government’s hostile environment to asylum seekers.

Speaking on the Fair Begins Here campaign, Lineker said: “Refugees have escaped unthinkable horrors in their home countries. We need a new system that reflects the will of the British people who have opened their homes, donated and volunteered in their local communities.”

Campaign demands include, ensuring protection for people fleeing war and persecution by upholding international law and scrapping the Rwanda scheme. Providing a proper strategy for welcoming and integrating refugees through the application process, for example by allowing them to work and learn English. Forging stronger global cooperation in order to tackle the root causes forcing people to seek asylum, and providing safe routes of travel.

The letter reads: “Britain’s refugee system has become ever-more uncaring, chaotic and costly.

“These policies aren’t working for refugees and they aren’t working for local communities. That’s why we have come together to say we’ve had enough. Enough of the division. Enough of the short-term thinking. Enough of the wasted human potential. And it’s why we now call for something better.”

“Given the chance, we know communities across our country go the extra mile to welcome refugees – opening their homes, volunteering, speaking up, donating. And, given the chance, refugees do so much to enrich our society as they build new lives.”

Image credit: Flickr

Hannah Davenport is news reporter at Left Foot Forward, focusing on trade unions and environmental issues

Even a right-wing think tank fears Britain is slipping back to Victorian levels of inequality under the Tories

'The most disadvantaged in Britain are no better off than 15 years ago'

\
Basit Mahmood 

11 December, 2023

LEFT FOOT FORWARD


Poverty and inequality have worsened so much under the Tories, that even a right-wing think tank fears that Britain is slipping back to the social divides of the Victorian era, ‘marked by a widening gulf between mainstream society and a depressed and poverty-stricken underclass’.

A scathing report by The Centre for Social Justice (CSJ), which counts among its co-founders former Tory Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith, argues that the most disadvantaged in Britain are no better off than 15 years ago and that the ‘gap between the so-called “haves” and “have nots” has blown wide open’.

The CSJ’s report comes after a recent report from the Resolution Foundation which found that fifteen years of economic stagnation have left the typical UK household £8,300 poorer than peers in countries like France and Germany.

The report from the CSJ, called the ‘Two Nations: The State of Poverty in the UK’, also highlighted the impact of Covid lockdowns, particularly on the mental health of children, with one in five children assessed as having a clinically recognisable mental health problem, up from one in nine, 20 years ago.

The CSJ states: “If trends continue, the report argues that by 2030 over one in four 5 – 15-year-olds – which may be as many as 2.3 million children – could have a mental disorder. There are likely to be 108 per cent more boys with mental health disorders by 2030 than there would have been if the lockdown had not happened. We should worry about the problems of the next generation.”

Lord King, the former Governor of the Bank of England, who is among the Commissioners of the report, said that support for families was vital. He said: “Money is not the only solution to the problem of deprivation. One glimmer of light is the institution of the family – rather than government – as a place of nurture, support, and fulfilment. No family is perfect, and families come in all different shapes and sizes. But if we are able to do more to support the family, then we can prevent the creation of an “unhappy generation”.”

Andy Cook, Chief Executive of the Centre for Social Justice, said: “This report makes for deeply uncomfortable reading. Lockdown policy poured petrol on the fire that had already been there in the most disadvantaged people’s lives, and so far no one has offered a plan to match the scale of the issues.

“What this report shows is that we need far more than discussions on finance redistribution, but a strategy to go after the root causes of poverty – education, work, debt, addiction and family.”

EXCLUSIVE: Majority of voters say Brexit has been unsuccessful, poll finds

The findings come at a time when demand to reverse Brexit has hit its highest ever level.

Basit Mahmood 

Today
Left Foot Forward

A majority of voters believe that Brexit has been unsuccessful, an exclusive poll for LFF has found.

Asked to what extent they would you say that Brexit has been successful, or unsuccessful, 54% of voters said that they thought Brexit had been unsuccessful. Only 34% of voters say that Brexit has been a success.

The poll, carried out by Savanta, also found that those aged between 55-64 were most likely to say that Brexit had been a failure, with 59% of those asked saying that Brexit had been unsuccessful. The figure drops to 55% among 18-24 year olds.

When it comes to party affiliation, while 38% of Conservative Party voters believe Brexit has been unsuccessful, the figure rises to 69% of Labour Party voters and 73% of Lib Dem voters. 67% of Green Party voters also think Brexit has been unsuccessful.

Last month, polling from YouGov showed that just 12% of the country think that the UK’s split with the European Union has gone well. To make matters worse for Brexiteers, just 2% of those asked said that they think Brexit has gone ‘very well’.

The findings come at a time when demand to reverse Brexit has hit its highest ever level. A poll from WeThink, affiliated with Omnisis, shows that 63% of those surveyed believe that the UK should now reverse the referendum result, and return to its previous trading relationship with the bloc. Just 37% of voters want to stay out of the EU.

Shocking chart shows how much of a failure the Tories have been for the NHS

A failure to increase spending and investment as a share of GDP has resulted in multiple crises affecting the NHS

Basit Mahmood 

11 December, 2023

Left Foot Forward

Years of underinvestment as well as Tory austerity have left the National Health Service (NHS) on its knees, despite Tory claims that it is protecting NHS spending.

A failure to increase spending and investment as a share of GDP has resulted in multiple crises affecting the NHS, including record high waiting lists, high staff vacancy rates and outdated buildings and equipment.

The shocking chart from the FT below shows how much of a failure this Tory government has been when it comes to waiting lists, with a sharp rise in waiting lists under Tory administrations.

\

(Picture credit: FT)

Official figures show that the NHS waiting list in England has hit a record high of nearly 7.8 million. The backlog hit 7.75 million, which includes people waiting for multiple tests or procedures, up from 7.68 million in July. It is the highest number since records began in August 2007.

The facts speak for themselves. While under the last Labour government, waiting lists went down significantly, it’s under Tory administrations that they have hit record highs.

Basit Mahmood is editor of Left Foot Forward